Low or high power hand held? (1 Viewer)

[Swampy Sam]

Just wanted to get some input from everyone. Hand holding binos? Would you prefer lower power with less shake or higher power more shake. As you are sacrificing magnification of detail. Just wanted too know if anyone else can not let the magnification thing go?

 

[Pinewood]

Just wanted to get some input from everyone. Hand holding binos? Would you prefer lower power with less shake or higher power more shake. As you are sacrificing magnification of detail. Just wanted too know if anyone else can not let the magnification thing go?

Hello Sam,

I have binoculars from 6x to 15x. I prefer the stability of the 7x, but I occasionally wish more reach. I generally bird watch with an 8x, but I used to carry both a 7x and a 10x. Even with a 10x, I find stability to be problematic fro anything much above the horizon. Needless to write, I use some kind of support for my 12x and 15x. A monopod for the former and a tripod for the latter.

Stay safe,
Arthur Pinewood

 

[tenex]

With binoculars from 6x to 15x in regular use, you will find many threads here on this subject. Some say they don't even feel comfortable handholding 10x, though most do; some say they find 15x useful without a tripod, though most don't. Experimental data show a steadily decreasing benefit up to around 15x, not much after that. Most people think it's just about shaky hands, but I think the brain also adapts to that with practice. The choice does depend on the specific purpose (if any), and individual experience varies so you will simply have to decide this for yourself. (I love my 15x56 SLC if that helps.)

 

[Tringa45]

The higher the magnification, the more shake, the smaller the exit pupil, the narrower the field of view and the lower the depth of field.
7x and 8x for me. My 10x is in semi-retirement.

John

 

[Richard D]

One thing to consider is shake isn't solely influenced by magnification, how well the binocular is balanced plays a very big role, and heavier binoculars are a lot more stable due to their mass, up until the point that fatigue plays a part.

I'm mainly a 10x user - I tend to bird in open countryside, marshs etc. where reach is essential. If I'm birding in woodland I'll use 7s, wandering around hedgerows etc. 8s are adequate. I also use 15x56s handheld - sitting in a hide with those yesterday, I could easily make out distant Sandwich Terns that I might have strugglled with using 10s...

I've tried several 10x25's and found them to light for the magnification to hold steady enough to have a real advantage over 8x25's but at 10x32 I'm okay with some binoculars... We all have different abilities to hold steady, different needs etc.

Increased magnification can sometimes allow you to id a bird even if you can't resolve much more fine detail - just being bigger and seeing broad features can help. I also like view filling images - seeing a buzzard filling the view of my 15x56s yesterday was a real treat, yes I could have identified it with 8s but the view wouldn't have filled me with as much pleasure.

Get to know other local birders, or have a chat with other birders at a reserve - mostly people will happily let you try their optics.

 

[Tringa45]

I also like view filling images - seeing a buzzard filling the view of my 15x56s yesterday was a real treat, yes I could have identified it with 8s but the view wouldn't have filled me with as much pleasure.

If it filled the FoV at 15x an unaided ID should have been possible.

One often reads here of comparisons between 8x and 10x and talk of "the additional 2x". It's not; it's only 25% theoretically and in practice probably not much better than half that. That's not a lot in comparison to the real advantage of an 8x binocular over the naked eye of perhaps 500%.

John

 

[Binocollector]

To answer the initial question:
I prefer less magnification and less shake. At the moment 7x35 (also 6x30 and 6.5x32) is my favourite size. But I do have some 10x binos that have really good ergonomics so seem to work fine hand-held. For higher power -- I'd reach for my Canon 18x50IS.

 

[Alexis Powell]

Depends entirely on what you are trying to do. For some purposes to which people put binoculars, an occasional momentarily stable glimpse at high mag between bouts of shaking is what is needed. By contrast, for most types of birding, a steady view with maximum field of view and depth of field is much more valuable. A 16x bin provides an image only twice the size of an 8x but gives up a lot in FOV and DOF. I find magnification highly overrated for birding bins, so I always use 7, 8, or 8.5x bins. I can hold 10x steady but the magnification gain (20%) is a trivial benefit versus the reduced FOV and DOF. For most birding, it's more about how quickly one can get on the bird (i.e. acquire it in FOV with sharp focus), not specifics of magnification. If I need magnification for distant birds, I use a scope at 30x (and sometimes higher magnifications, but 30x allows most birds to be identified).

--AP

 

[Hermann]

Get a stabilised pair of binoculars. Pick the magnification you're most comfortable with.

End of story.

Hermann

 

[chill6x6]

Really 7X is more forgiving but like most I use an 8X most of the time and really don't find "shake" that much of an issue until 12X or so. If I need a little help to steady the image more times than not a tree or railing is available. Usually when I DO try to steady the image it's because I'm viewing to the edge of what 8X will DO or lighting is poor and usually can't ID the bird regardless.

 

[NDhunter]

It is a matter of physics. It is easier to handhold and use a lower power optic than a higher power one.
On a site like this, it is good to find something factual.

Jerry

 

[Richard D]

Depends entirely on what you are trying to do. For some purposes to which people put binoculars, an occasional momentarily stable glimpse at high mag between bouts of shaking is what is needed. By contrast, for most types of birding, a steady view with maximum field of view and depth of field is much more valuable. A 16x bin provides an image only twice the size of an 8x but gives up a lot in FOV and DOF. I find magnification highly overrated for birding bins, so I always use 7, 8, or 8.5x bins. I can hold 10x steady but the magnification gain (20%) is a trivial benefit versus the reduced FOV and DOF. For most birding, it's more about how quickly one can get on the bird (i.e. acquire it in FOV with sharp focus), not specifics of magnification. If I need magnification for distant birds, I use a scope at 30x (and sometimes higher magnifications, but 30x allows most birds to be identified).

--AP

I agree if you're not able to hold a steady view for more than an occasional moment then it makes sense to use stick to lower magnifications. Some people do struggle with 10 - 15, others cope okay -I can hold 15x56's and get a pretty stable view, but I don't get on with 10x25s, some people are fine with 10x25s. There's no one size fit's all solution.

Scopes are great if you're not moving around much, but they take time to set up and focus, even if you carry them connected to a tripod. Personally I find them cumbersome for long stop/start walks, and as you say how quickly you can get on the bird is important. 15x can fill the gap for more distant birds on marshland or coastal walks, but for woodland or other close range birding I'd use 7/8s. FoV can be an issue - trying to track a flying bird with a 30x scope is pretty much impossible, better although not great with 15x, but for me generally okay with most 10's or 8s. Personally I've never found DoF a big issue for anything other than close range birding - I don't find a focusing an 8 vs a 10x bin at 30-50ft takes a significantly different length of time.

I enjoy using different binoculars for different environments. The vast majority of binoculars made and sold are 8s and 10s and they're probably the best compromise focal lengths, but 7's and 15's have their places.

 

[Richard D]

It is a matter of physics. It is easier to handhold and use a lower power optic than a higher power one.
On a site like this, it is good to find something factual.

Jerry

To a point, assuming everything is equal... It's also easier to hold a heavier binocular stable than a lightweight one - mass has inertia, and it also depends where the mass is distributed in relation to where you hold the binoculars - again basic physics.

 

[Mike Crawley]

It sort of depends on what you define as "high power".

x12 ?
x15 ?

I consider x10 as "everyday".
I find I can hold steady, for a few minutes at least, my 10x42 Swarovski ELs with one hand, possibly it’s their superb balance - admittedly only really useful on a windy headland where I want to be sure my ‘scope and tripod doesn’t fall.

 

[edwincjones]

IS - you can have both high mag and low shakes

edj

 

[Trinovid]

Would you prefer lower power with less shake or higher power more shake.

I just got my first 10x binoculars from another member here and even though they're lighter than most of my other 8x, I'm not noticing any trouble with vibration.

Outside of having a smaller field of view leading to slightly slower acquisition, I'm really enjoying them and starting to think about selling my otherwise identical 8x32 Ultravid HD+.

 

[William Lewis]

I go for less power, less shakes, greater depth of field and have found 7x the sweet spot for me.

I've used 8x and 10x a lot in the past.

The other thing to consider is the affect of the magnification on the exit pupil - as an example you'd have to have 60mm objectives to get the same exit pupil as a 7x42 in a 10x.... When it's getting dim or if you want it to get dimmer for a bit of stargazing that can make a difference.

 

[Swampy Sam]

Thanks everyone. I was out this weekend with my 6x30 kowa. For birds in flight they are great, birds in trees at a distance not so. I have my 10x 42 SLC s on my tripod . I almost feel not having my swarro s mounted on a tripod as a waste. I bought a pair of Vortex DB 15x56 binos. These are good for distance, but keep going back to the Swarros on the tripod.

 

[tenex]

I just got my first 10x binoculars from another member here and even though they're lighter than most of my other 8x, I'm not noticing any trouble with vibration.

Outside of having a smaller field of view leading to slightly slower acquisition, I'm really enjoying them and starting to think about selling my otherwise identical 8x32 Ultravid HD+.

I've used that 10x32 (and the BN before it) for over 20 years. Its AFOV is more generous than the 8x, and acquisition should improve with practice. Enjoy!

 

[Robert Wallace]

IS - you can have both high mag and low shakes

edj

But with reduced FOV and increased weight?